TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] POSSIBLE REBUTTAL TO JB

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] POSSIBLE REBUTTAL TO JB
From: Steven Kline <skline4@verizon.net>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 11:01:17 -0600
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
FWIW.   No reflector should be a media for “bullying” or “name calling” at any 
point, for any discussion, heated or not.  The Ten-Tec reflector seems to be in 
need of better thread moderation - e.g. terminating discussion on a particular 
thread, when adequate information has been rendered or reached a point of 
diminishing return,  which this one has.

There is no need for self-imposed exile.  A mistake on the keyboard happened 
and apologies made.  Let’s move on.  End the thread and discussion.  Or… 
perhaps form a new discussion topic and focus on specific switchers known to be 
noisy.

Steve - W5JK


  
On Jan 19, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Clayton Brantley <clayton_n4ev@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I have to agree with your thoughts on switch mode power supplies.  I am a 
> linear
> power supply man myself and my thoughts about switch mode supplies is just
> simply they belong in the garbage dump.  My station supply is an old GE 
> repeater
> supply with a back-up battery.
> 
> Name calling will not work here because there are those that know the real 
> facts
> and the facts cannot be hidden.
> 
> Clayton N4EV
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sunday, January 19, 2014 3:15 AM, Richards <jrichards@k8jhr.com> wrote:
> 
>    HI -- I WROTE THIS REBUTTAL TO GOOD OL' JB BUT I DID NOT SEND IT AND 
> PROBABLY WON'T - BUT WONDER  IF IT MAKES SENSE AND IF NOT, WHY NOT... 
> HE JUST BURNS ME UP WHEN HE BLOWS ME OFF BY SAYING I AM IGNORANT... THAT 
> IS NOT AN ARGUMENT, IT IS JUST NAME CALLING...
> 
> OHHHHH..... HE BURNS ME UP...
> 
> ANY REASON THIS LOGIC IS WRONG?
> 
>     Note - Again I did not send it and probably won't
>     but I am sick and tired of his being a bully instead
>     of a teacher.
> 
> 
> 
>     -- JHR  --
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> DRAFT         DRAFT        DRAFT      DRAFT
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> On 1/17/2014 4:43 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
> 
>> No, there is a gap in your knowledge of fundamental electricity and
>> electronics.
> 
> 
>     OK... once again, you tell me I am ignorant, rather
>     than explaining it.    One does not need an
>     engineering degree to get this.
> 
>     
>     FACT - switch mode supplies are often noisy.   In fact,
>     the new Chinese supplies have a knob to "shift" the
>     noise when it adversely affects the operating frequency.
>     You can debate whether or not that is "good engineering"
>     practice, but there it is.
> 
>     FACT - linear supplies seem inherently less problematic,
>     and don't seem to have these extra noise controls.
> 
>     FACT - historically, when switch mode supplies first
>     arrived on the scene, there were many complaints about
>     excessive noise - certainly more or different types of
>     complaints than hams were expressing about linear supplies.
>     
>     If switch mode supplies were not inherently noisy, there
>     would be no discussion about whether or not "good
>     engineering practice" has sufficiently masked, suppressed
>     or fixed them to make them useful in the shack.
> 
>     Your spin makes it sound like there is no issue or
>     problem at all, and I don't accept that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> No, we simply follow good engineering practice when designing and
>> manufacturing the product in question.
> 
> 
>     
>     OK... I guess what you call "good engineering practice,"
>     - I call masking and suppressing noise.  Manufactures
>     have "improved" them over time, but I do not believe
>     they have done a complete job of it.
> 
>     
>     FACT - Ten Tec sells switch mode supplies it concedes
>     make noise outside the ham bands - rendering them
>     useless when using their own general coverage receivers.
>     This does not happen with a linear supply.
> 
> 
>       So, you can call me ignorant...again... and smother me
>     with a vitae of advanced degrees...but the fact is,
>     I prefer linear supplies because they seem to be
>     inherently less problematic, much quieter and do not
>     produce the same noise my TenTec switch mode supply does.
> 
>     Paul Clinton admits switch mode supplies are noisy,
>     but TT does not care, because they don't make noise in
>     the ham bands.  Apparently they are not intended to
>     work with their general coverage receivers and other
>     radios.
> 
>     
> 
> 
>> Enough with dumb analogies.  Go to the ARRL Handbook and study the
>> fundamentals.
> 
> 
>     I read that, and it sounds like switch mode supplies make
>     noise that "good engineering pracitce"  is supposed to
>     mask or suppress.    But, calling me names does not
>     provide an explanation... It takes logic, science, and
>     a little patience to accomplish that.
> 
>     The discussion is based on the fact that switching
>     mode supplies are inherently noisy - or at least more
>     noisy than linear supplies.   It did not just arise
>     out of nothing.
> 
>     Anyone wanna buy my Ten-Tec switch mode power supply ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> __________________________ JHR ________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>